PCN as a visitor of a private car park

zeusxav

Gr1pr said:

That appears to be a defence, which it says at the top and at the bottom , but your actual defence is back on page one   ( it has an out of date statement of truth too, not been used since 2020. !  )

You should be studying and drafting your WITNESS STATEMENT, which it will state more than once 

oh no!  I'm thick!  So i don't use all that info?  Just state what happened?

Gr1pr

Correct, you are the first witness, as the defendant, so you write your own statement and include Exhibits, known as a bundle 

Study other recent cases on here from this year only, see what theirs contain, plus the structures and wording 

zeusxav

Name of Witness: G H                                                                                        

IN THE COUNTY COURT AT LIVERPOOL, CIVIL AND FAMILY COURTS

                                                                                                                                                                                     Claim No.:XXXX

VEHICLE CONTROL SERVICES LIMITED

(Claimant)

V

x x

(Defendant)

 ________

 WITNESS STATEMENT OF G H

I am G H and I am the defendant against who this claim is made.  The facts below are true to the best of my belief and my account has been prepared based upon my own knowledge.

In my statement I shall refer to exhibits supplied with this statement, referring to page and reference numbers where appropriate. My defence is repeated, and I will say as follows:

1. B T is managed by Berkeley Shaw Real Estate who sub contract to Proguard security and concierge.  Proguard employees at Beetham Tower are employed by the tenants. At the time of the alleged incident there were 3 members of the concierge. 
2. The private land identified as Beetham Tower Car park is below a tower block of residential apartments, not commercial as stated in the claimants letter to me dated 8 November 2023, exhibit XX.
3. My friend, C R, is a tenant of apartment XX Beetham Tower. I was invited to stay over with C between 30 September 2023 - 2 October 2023.
4. On 30 October 2023 C asked one of the concierge staff if they could allocate a visitor space for 30th September 2024 until 2 October 2024.  The space allocated was un-numbered and known within the building as the maintenance bay.  This is shown in exhibit XXX
5. T, one of the concierge staff gave me C's fob to access the shutter as she had left for work when I arrived.  T gave me directions to drive to the rear of the building and advised me of which specific car park space which he had allocated for me.
6. I stayed over several times with my friend until Christmas 2023 utilising the parking amenities as directed by the concierge.  I was never provided a parking permit as requested by the claimant.
7. The claimant states that adequate signage is displayed in the car park.  I dispute this as shown in exhibit XX.  When I was given permission to park overnight on 24th November 2023 I took photographs of the entrance and the route to the allocated car park space, as shown in the evidence.  The exterior signage is blank.  Once the shutters open the ramp down to the allocated parking space does not have any signage whatsoever.  Again - in the vicinity of the allocated parking space there is no signage.  Even if there had been adequate signage it would not have been relevant when a tenant was given permission for visitor parking.
8. Parking permits are not issued as stated by the claimant.  C R rents a parking space, namely number XX, and has never been issued with a parking permit, also shown in exhibit XX.  I have utilised the parking facilities on 3 separate occasions with permission and I was not provided with a parking permit.
9. I deny that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.
10. The Particulars of Claim on the Claim Form refer to 'Parking Charge(s)' incurred on 30/09/2023. However, they state parking was in breach of the advertised terms and conditions: namely Parked in a restricted//prohibited area.  As per the attached photographic evidence the claimant does not have any advertised terms and conditions at the location on entrance, nor in prominent locations.
11. Given that there were no terms and conditions displayed the defendant refutes the claimants allegation that a contract has been entered into with Vehicle Control Services.
12. I would like to rely on Link Parking v Mr L C9GF5875 [2016] whereby it was found that there was no entrance signage to the residential site and the other signage was not visible.  The claim in that case was dismissed.
13. The allocated parking space, by the evidence supplied is not clearly marked or identified as a “restricted or prohibited area”.
14. I note that within the Protection of Freedoms Act (POFA) 2012 it discusses the clarity that needs to be provided to make a motorist aware of the parking charge. Specifically, it requires that the driver is given 'adequate notice' of the charge. POFA 2012 defines 'adequate notice' as follows:
’'(3) For the purposes of sub-paragraph (2.4) 'adequate notice' means notice given by: (a) the display of one or more notices in accordance with any applicable requirements prescribed in regulations under paragraph 12 for, or for purposes including, the purposes of sub-paragraph (2); or (b) where no such requirements apply, the display of one or more notices which: (i) specify the sum as the charge for unauthorised parking; and (ii) are adequate to bring the charge to the notice of drivers who park vehicles on the relevant land''.Even in circumstances where POFA 2012 does not apply, I believe this to be a reasonable standard to use when making my own assessment, as appellant, of the signage in place at the location.15. This Claimant's lack of large, readable signs are nothing like the yellow & black warnings seen in Beavis  nor do they meet the signage requirements in the DLUHC Code which reflects the already statutory requirement for 'prominence' (Consumer Rights Act 2015 - the ‘CRA’).16. I, at all material times, parked in accordance with the terms granted by the concierge staff. The lack of the Claimant's signage, and the purported contractual terms not conveyed therein, are incapable of binding me in any way, and their existence does not constitute a legally valid contract with the claimant.17. The Claimant has added additional sums to the original £100 parking charge, for which no explanation or justification has been provided. Schedule 4 of the Protection Of Freedoms Act, at 4(5), states that the maximum sum which can be recovered is that specified in the Notice to Keeper, which is £100 in this instance. It is submitted that this is an attempt at double recovery by the Claimant, which the Court should not uphold, even in the event that Judgment for Claimant is awarded.18. For all or any of the reasons stated above, the Court is invited to dismiss the Claim in its entirety. Given that the claim is based on an alleged contractual parking charge of £100 - already significantly inflated and mostly representing profit, as was found in Beavis - but the amount claimed on the claim form is inexplicably £255.00, the Defendant avers that this inflation of the considered amount is a gross abuse of process.I believe that the facts stated in this statement are true.  I understand that proceedings fir contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without and honest belief in its truth.

zeusxav

Oh the formatting has lost when I've pasted it

Is this right please?

KeithP

The first few words of your first paragraph are "1. B T is managed...".
I immediately found myself wondering who, or what, is/are B T.
All becomes clear later, but it's not who or what I thought it might be. 

Coupon-mad

Remove this because there's no point talking about another county court case with no transcript:

I would like to rely on Link Parking v Mr L C9GF5875 [2016] whereby it was found that there was no entrance signage to the residential site and the other signage was not visible.  The claim in that case was dismissed.

And remove 'as appellant' from 15 because you are not an 'appellant' in court.

OK: a good start but go and read the FINAL draft witness statements from these usernames:

@Defendant911

@Harry77

@kgirl123

The first two have recently won and the final one includes a rather wordy WS but it shows you what you are missing in terms of exhibits.

zeusxav

Thanks for the feedback

How did those people see the claimants witness statement first?  VCS didn't send me a copy of their N180 and apart from a without prejudice letter offering a reduced payment I haven't received anything from them. 
I'm away for two weeks so need to have my bundle sent early.  I thought the exhibits were my evidence - I have a witness statement from my friend and photos.
Its so confusing as those cases don't seem to be the same as mine

Gr1pr

They all had the same deadline date as the claimant in each and every case, so your bundle deadline is the same as theirs, hence why neither party has seen the other's yet 

You are the first witness, your friend is the second witness 

Exhibits are evidence, including those from recognised cases and transcripts, to support your case 

The lack of a N180 from VCS is not going to win this case, it's no Biggie, so don't think about it 

You are the defendant, not an appellant 

Use the full name before adding initials, so expand on B.T.

There are spelling errors in your draft above, so fix them and check in future, using a spell checker, one is in the statement of truth 

Very few cases are the same, but you have been given 3 good exemplars to look at, for inspiration for your own bundle 

zeusxav

Thank you

Ah, I wasn't sure how Harry77 could reply to the claimants WS.

So if I quote beavis I need to get the transcript of the case.

I've taken out appellant.

If I add the transcript for the Link case in exhibits can I use this?  

I'd just started taking out identifiable info - the full name is on the actual statement.

I've spell checked it and nothing is flagging - except last para said 'fir' instead of 'for'. Anything else I missed please?

Coupon-mad

You so not need the transcript of Beavis (also it's sooo easy to Google).  The a-f list of suggested exhibits tells you exactly what to exhibit & it's not the entire Beavis case.